Anger against judges can now be resolved, says Law Advisor Asif Nazrul

There is a lot of anger among students about some High Court judges who were ‘reported for corruption’ and were ‘instruments of fascist forces’, he says

Law Advisor Asif Nazrul says the provision to remove judges through a Supreme Judicial Council has opened up an opportunity to resolve the "anger accumulated in various quarters" with the judges.

While talking to reporters at the Secretariat on Sunday, he said that the Appellate Division’s decision carries "special significance" in the circumstances after the fall of the Awami League government in the face of mass uprising.

Asif said, “The Supreme Judicial Council has been resurrected by settling the review of the case. There was some confusion about this, but today's court ruling cleared up that confusion. The Supreme Judicial Council can now be fully operational.”

"We have some judges in the High Court against whom there are many complaints from every level of society. They have become the instruments of oppression of the fascist forces that fell during the July revolution. Newspapers have reported on corruption allegations against some of them. There is a lot of anger among the student population against them.”

“The Supreme Judicial Council has created an avenue to redress all these grievances constitutionally. I think the students will get an opportunity to express their grievances."

During the previous Awami League government, parliament was given the power to remove judges through the 16th Amendment to the Constitution. This led to tensions between the government and the Supreme Court.

In 2017, the Appellate Division decided the 16th Amendment was illegal and declared it null and void in a writ case. The judgment then revived the Supreme Court Judicial Council for the removal of judges.

The decision of the Appellate Bench led by then chief justice SK Sinha raised the tension between the judiciary and the government.

The state then petitioned for a review of the decision, but did not take the initiative to hold a hearing on the matter.

Though there was nothing preventing the formation of a judicial council to remove a judge, none was formed in the past seven years due to the Awami League government’s differing views on the matter and the pending review.

As a result, despite allegations of corruption against three High Court judges, no action was taken on the matter.

After the fall of the Awami League government, the Anti-discrimination Student Movement has demanded the removal of pro-Awami League ‘partisan’ judges. The chief justice decided to bar 12 judges from sitting on a bench following a student protest that besieged the Supreme Court.

This revived the issue of the pending 16th Amendment case hearing.

The petition was then put on the cause list of the court on Sunday. A bench of six Appellate Division justices led by Chief Justice Syed Refaat Ahmed then upheld the previous decision, reinstating the Supreme Judicial Councils.

Now, if a judge proves unable to perform their duties or a complaint of professional misconduct is raised, action can be taken through a Supreme Judicial Council.

Lawyers believe the decision on the review verdict has resolved the complications that arose during the previous government’s reign on the process for the removal of judges.

The legal advisor said, "When there was no Supreme Judicial Council, there were many judgments that were ordered [by the Awami League government]. Tarique Rahman's freedom of speech was taken away. Many people did not get the opportunity to come to court and fight for their human rights. Those who are in charge now, I think they have an opportunity to ensure that accountability."